Re: Coding style 🙄 : `int` vs `intX_t` vs `unsigned/uintX_t`

2019-07-09 Thread Gerald Squelart
On Wednesday, July 10, 2019 at 9:12:23 AM UTC+10, Bobby Holley wrote: > On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 3:23 PM Mike Hommey wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 10:39:37AM -0400, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 11:00 PM Gerald Squelart > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Thank you all for some v

Re: Intent to prototype and ship: CSS `quotes: auto`

2019-07-09 Thread fantasai
On 7/8/19 3:53 AM, Jonathan Kew wrote: Summary: Adding a new `auto` value as the initial value of CSS `quotes` property, with the behavior that language-sensitive quotation marks (derived from CLDR) are used for quote-open/close generated content. Bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cg

Intent to ship: Percentage opacity

2019-07-09 Thread Boris Chiou
Hi, Summary: Per the recent discussion of the spec, we would like to add to opacity related properties. The following properties will support not only but also : 1. opacity 2. flood-opacity

Re: Coding style 🙄 : `int` vs `intX_t` vs `unsigned/uintX_t`

2019-07-09 Thread Bobby Holley
On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 3:23 PM Mike Hommey wrote: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 10:39:37AM -0400, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 11:00 PM Gerald Squelart > > wrote: > > > > > Thank you all for some very interesting discussions so far. > > > > > > Even if we don't take blanket steps

Re: Coding style 🙄 : `int` vs `intX_t` vs `unsigned/uintX_t`

2019-07-09 Thread Mike Hommey
On Tue, Jul 09, 2019 at 10:39:37AM -0400, Ehsan Akhgari wrote: > On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 11:00 PM Gerald Squelart > wrote: > > > Thank you all for some very interesting discussions so far. > > > > Even if we don't take blanket steps to avoid unsigned types in > > non-bitfield/modulo cases (as sugg

Re: Intent to Implement: CSS backdrop-filter

2019-07-09 Thread L. David Baron
On Monday 2019-07-08 15:21 -0700, Connor Brewster wrote: > Hi Ehsan, > > Currently, the plan is to develop this feature behind a pref flag that will > be off by default. We haven't decided the best way forward for enabling > this feature by default yet. We have two possible options: > 1. Add back

Re: Intent to Implement: CSS backdrop-filter

2019-07-09 Thread Connor Brewster
Hi Tom, > In particular, this one looks like it has all the same > concerns/problems with filters being applied to sensitive third party > content, and attacks that use timing to read that content. Are these > going to be tested for/addressed during implementation? We are not aware of any new att

Re: Revising the frequency threshold for disabling intermittents?

2019-07-09 Thread Maher（ 馬羅成 ）Joel
One thing we could do is exclude try runs from the counts, that would make the bugzilla comments less confusing. As for actual number of runs, we would need to ingest the raw logs in a reliable more deterministic way- that is a few TB/week. There are plans to take ActiveData (which ingests all th

Re: Coding style 🙄 : `int` vs `intX_t` vs `unsigned/uintX_t`

2019-07-09 Thread Ehsan Akhgari
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 11:00 PM Gerald Squelart wrote: > Thank you all for some very interesting discussions so far. > > Even if we don't take blanket steps to avoid unsigned types in > non-bitfield/modulo cases (as suggested by our newly-adopted Google style), > at least hopefully we're now awar

Re: Intent to Implement: CSS backdrop-filter

2019-07-09 Thread Ehsan Akhgari
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 6:22 PM Connor Brewster wrote: > Hi Ehsan, > > Currently, the plan is to develop this feature behind a pref flag that > will be off by default. We haven't decided the best way forward for > enabling this feature by default yet. We have two possible options: > 1. Add backdr